In the final 538 podcast, Nate Silver indicated that Michigan would provide the night's biggest surprise. I concur, though for differing reasons. I never believed that Bernie Sanders' primary victory -- which defied all of the polls -- was legitimate.
Yes, I know that, as of this morning, PPP polling gives Hillary a six point advantage in MI. Guess what? The polls had Hillary up by 21 points over Bernie during the primaries -- yet he eked out a narrow win, thereby hobbling Hillary for the remainder of the primary race. The conventional explanations for his victory in that state leave me unpersuaded.
2004 and 2008 taught us an important lesson: Always look to the Secretary of State. MI's SOS is an ambitious Republican named Ruth Johnson, the former running mate of Dick DeVos, heir to the scAmway fortune. (Side note: I do hope that you caught John Oliver's brilliant takedown of MLMs.) The DeVos family -- politically comparable to the Koch clan -- has treated Trump warily, but they despise the Clintons and anything that stinks of liberalism.
That's right, folks: The fate of our nation depends on the honesty of a woman linked to those awful vile disgusting Amway people.
Being a Natural Born Eeyore and a presume-the-worst kind-o-guy, I feel inclined to count Michigan out. To make up for the loss of MI, Clinton must win either Florida or North Carolina. Given the most recent polling data, a win in either state -- or both -- is quite possible.
If I'm right, Hillary will end up well ahead in the raw votes, while Trump will pull ahead in the electoral college.
If I were writing for one of the large Democratic sites, I could never express this level of pessimism. Party cheerleaders are quick to accuse us glass-half-empty types of being evil GOP ratfuckers intent on suppressing the vote. A ridiculous charge, that: No-one is going to say "Well, Cannon thinks that Michigan is going to go for Trump, so let's just stay home."
Gazing into the abyss. My readers need no reminders of the disaster that awaits us should Trump pull off a victory. This hasn't been an election about policy -- Trump changes stances the way a fashion model changes outfits -- but those views which he has espoused with some consistency are downright horrifying.
He wants rid of the FDA. This would allow all sorts of poisons to seep into your foods, as occurred in the bad old days; it would also allow people like Alex Jones to rake in millions selling crackpot remedies.
Trump also wants to rid of the EPA -- a move that would replicate the Flint, MI "miracle" across the land.
Trump has danced back and forth on the need for a higher minimum wage, but everyone with any sense knows that he was at his most sincere when he said that wages should go lower.
And of course, Trump wants to scale back OSHA. Getting rid of worker safety will make America Great Again.
Trump's policies, if enacted, would result in a $5.3 trillion deficit. (Bill Clinton, by contrast, balanced the budget.) Trump will cut taxes on the wealthy, even though the vast majority favor increasing taxes on those with very high incomes.
Say goodbye to Obamacare, of course. Say hello to the old system, or non-system. Trump says that he will replace O-care with something better, although he won't say what that "something better" is. Do any of you recall 1980, when Reagan insisted that he would replace the Equal Rights Amendment with something better? After the election, that promise went down the memory hole.
Far from being a change agent, Trump would rely on trickle-down economics: If you give the rich everything they could possibly want, they may increase the number of American jobs. Or they may just move more factories overseas. I do not for one second believe Trump's promises to increase tarriffs on products created with outsourced labor. Everyone knows that The Donald is all about The Dollar. Since he refuses to place his fortune in a blind trust, any capitalist enterprise could get favorable treatment through the simple exchange of baksheesh.
Donald Trump means war. He is belligerent, vindictive, and impulsive by nature; his penchant for fighting is what caused his family to send him to military school. War-lovers like Michael Flynn, Michael Ledeen and Joseph Schmitz all love Donald Trump. Given the proper incentive, Trump will backstab his buddy Putin -- just as Putin (it seems) was ready to backstab Trump after the Khan family fiasco. If and when the two men bicker, we would return to the New Cold War paradigm, albeit with an unstable, violence-prone man-child in the Oval Office.
Trump not only wants an end to the Iran deal, he has expressed an insane determination to go to war with that country because Iranian sailors made rude gestures to American sailors on the high seas. That's almost as nuts as the tennis ball scene in Henry V. Yes, Donald Trump really is willing to risk World War III simply because some Iranian swabbies flipped the bird at American swabbies.
Hillary Clinton is far closer to the neocons than most of us would like. But she does not want war. Covert action, perhaps -- and on this front, we must always oppose her.
In the absence of an extraordinary provocation, a Clinton war is unthinkable, because such a war would have no constituency. The Republicans, of course, will reflexively oppose anything she proposes. The Democratic rank and file does not want to see boots hit the ground in any foreign land, at least not without an irrefutably good reason. Hillary is not impulsive, petty or bloodthirsty. Bill Clinton offered eight years of peace nestled between two bellicose Bush presidencies, and Hillary hopes to establish the same kind of record.
Although I do not expect to like Hillary Clinton's foreign policies -- in fact, I expect to get royally pissed off -- a foolhardy military adventurism seems out of the question.
Pray that either NC or FL goes blue!
If one or the other of those two battleground states veers toward Hillary, our troubles will not be over. We must do something about the new fascist movement which bedevils this nation. It's not enough to defeat Trump; we must defeat Trumpism.
The best way to pull off that trick is to discredit the man himself. Fascist movements usually involve cults of personality. Toppling the God will demolish the devotees.
The law can, and should, bring an end to Donald Trump.
As everyone knows, Donald Trump faces a severe legal test in the upcoming "Trump University" trial, in which he faces civil racketeering charges. The case against him is strong; if he loses, he faces another bankruptcy -- and this one will probably reduce him to financial ashes.
But that's just the beginning. His problems are well-summarized here:
Author Malcom Gladwell just told Canadian TV that he thinks Donald Trump will be in jail within a year because of his numerous legal entanglements, especially those related to the Trump University fraud case and his Russian ties. The New York Magazine writer was asked what he thought a Trump presidency would be like, and this was his response:The New York Attorney General is investigating Trump's crooked Foundation -- a fact which has received insufficient attention in recent weeks. The DOJ should look into the possible (and by "possible" I mean "obvious") bribery of Pam Bondi.
I think he’ll be in jail within a year. We’ve got the Trump University fraud case, we probably have criminal charges coming out of his charitable donation [to Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi], we’ve got all of the Russian ties we don’t know much about. He’s got so many legal problems, I suspect he’ll spend the next few years huddled with his lawyers.
You will recall that Harry Reid said that the FBI has been keeping a tight lid on "explosive" information concerning Trump's ties to Putin. Who knows what has been going on behind our sleeping backs? If there has been any communication between Moscow and Team Trump, the NSA probably knows about it -- and if that communication suggests treason or some cognate crime, then the government could have easily obtained a warrant to eavesdrop on Team Trump's domestic communications.
Alessandro Machi, a longtime friend to this blog, argues that Trump's most inescapable problem may involve taxes. Remember the billion-dollar "loss" (of other people's money) that allowed Trump such a massive tax write-off?
When Donald Trump and his tax attorneys pulled a 20 year, 50 million dollar a year tax deduction out of their collective arses back in the mid 90's, they exposed Mr. Trump to auditing until at least six years AFTER the last deduction was taken. It has been reported that Mr. Trump has been taking that 50 million dollar a year tax deduction right up until very recently, perhaps as late as 2015.
The Forbes article cites an actual court case in which the statute of limitations doesn't start until after the Tax Benefit ends.
The court case U.S. vs Irby, states that the IRS statute of limitations does not start until the tax benefit has been completed. Therefore Donald Trump is STILL LIABLE for the entire 20 year, 1 billion dollar tax deduction that is most likely a slumbering tax fraud issue that could come back to haunt Mr.Trump were he to lose the 2016 Presidential Election.
Donald Trump does not just want to win the 2016 presidential election, Mr. Trump HAS to WIN so he can basically call off the IRS against himself.Here is perhaps the most telling point:
The ongoing nihilistic language and demeanor that Donald Trump has projectiled towards Hillary Clinton on a daily basis has left me wondering on many occasions how Mr. Trump can get away with making such outlandish and acidic comments towards his presidential competitor. The answer is Donald Trump is literally been going for broke.
If Donald Trump loses the 2016 presidential election, he may be the one in jail while also owing the IRS a couple billion dollars in back taxes.
From a psychological profiling vantage point, it makes perfect sense for Donald Trump to continually assail Hillary Clinton and accuse her of actions that require jail as a way to project Mr. Trump's own guilt onto another.Precisely.
Time and again, Trump has accused Hillary Clinton of the very evils of which he himself is guilty. He has called her unhinged. He has said that she possesses a poor temperament. He has accused her racism, even though he is the one who refused to rent to black people. At this point, I wouldn't be surprised to hear Donald Trump call Hillary Clinton paunchy and orange-hued.
Why does Donald Trump vehemently insists on Hillary Clinton's criminality? Because he himself is a career criminal.
Lock him up.
If Donald Trump finally ends up financially ruined and/or behind bars, his movement will evaporate.
But:
Justice can prevail can happen only if Hillary wins in either North Carolina or Florida. Or both. So make it happen!
12 comments:
I don't think he's actually leading a movement so much as he is tapping into real popular discontent.
I'm also reminded of the famous headline "Hitler Tamed by Prison".
Hitler went to prison when still a fairly young man. And arguably he WAS tamed by the experience. He decided to pursue power through elections instead of revolution -- and to ingratiate himself with the powerful while trying to placate the middle class.
Trump is not the cause of the lunatic, racist movement, he is the product of it. Just as Obama did not create racism, but exposed it and Hillary did not create misogyny, but exposed it.
I wonder how many voters will write in Bernie Sanders today. He himself has warned them not to.
Regarding Michigan primary: we have open primaries, so anyone can vote for either party. The repubs had a mangy field by the time we were up for the vote, so many goopers felt it would be a great idea to feck with the dem race. I did the same years ago, voting for McCain in the primary against Bush the Lesser. McCain took it, leading to the political demise of the stinking governor John Engler. Don't put too much faith in the primary results here.
tle
Write in's are a complete waste of time, unless on the local level and organized well. I'm pretty sure the Bernie supporters who are "never Hillary" types will go Stein or Johnson. I suspect many Bernie supporters will grit their teeth, hold their noses, and vote for Clinton (in fact, all the Bernie supporters I know, which isn't a whole lot, admittedly, are going to do just that). I seriously doubt there is more than a fraction of them that will write in Bernie or vote Trump. I hope not, anyway. For what it's work, the vast majority of people I know well are voting Clinton. A small number are voting Trump (ugh!), and one or two others 3rd party (though they may change their minds in the voting booth, hopefully).
I've gone back and forth on 3rd party or Clinton (NEVER Trump). Over the past month the scales have been tipping in Clinton's direction, even if it's only so I can call the Donald a LOOSER! That will be enough, as it's the worst insult he himself can imagine, so I really want to do my part to make it happen.
I wonder how many voters will write in Bernie Sanders today. He himself has warned them not to.
I damned sure thought about it, b (especially after the DNC email links). I'm certainly never giving a dime to the Democratic Party ever again (and I've given quite a few, in addition to a helluva lot of time in the past).
Listen to the resident.....nevermind. Bernie supporters have been burning UP my FB feed with apologies, appeals to other Bernie supporters to join them in voting for Hillary. Many are fully on board, from what I see.
Take care, Joe! Do something soothing or give yourself a treat. I've donned my pants suit and am headed out to join other odd-outs.
I will miss the net and be stuck with the tee-vee, oh lordy!
Hat Tip to "MIchael" who responded to a prior comment of mine on drum roll please, Cannonfire and mentioned the U.S. vs Irby court case. I had a hunch that income tax evasion statute of limitations start when the final act of evasion has finished rather then when the income tax was first filed and "MIchael" brought it home with the perfect tax court decision.
i hope we will be hearing more chants of "lock him up" as time goes since Donald Trump basically ran his entire campaign on Taxpayer's money while claiming it was his.
Michael, if you would like to be credited in the original article please tell me how you would like to be credited as "Michael" seemed to generic at the time I was writing the article.
Just a few hours now, my friend. It's going to be OK. She's got this.
Looks like Hillary Clinton not calling Trump a thief and a tax fraud may cost her the election. How everyone missed the statute of limitations not being over regarding Trump's IRS issues is beyond me. Why wasn't the Clinton campaign going hard for a public disclosure over Trump's wacky IRS tax dodge.
Post a Comment